The folks running Ronald Reagan Washington National Airport are advised to take a rudimentary course on the First Amendment to the US Constitution. No, blocking airport access roads is not a valid exercise of First Amendment rights.
Washington National Airport Is Wrong: Blocking Access To Airport Roads Is Not A Valid Exercise Of First Amendment Rights
Over the weekend, officials from National Airport in Washington, DC warned:
TRAFFIC ALERT: Expect delays around the airport due to a group in vehicles exercising first amendment rights in roadway. Use caution and expect slow moving vehicles.
Small problem: there is no First Amendment right to block traffic.
As the ACLU rightly notes, “Protesters do not have a First Amendment right to block pedestrian or vehicle traffic, or to prevent entry and exit from buildings…Indeed, the general public has a right to freedom of movement that police must protect.”
Indeed, we do have a constitutionally-protected right to travel. But we don’t have the right to block traffic or yell “fire” in a crowded theatre.
I’m not advocating for the right to run over protestors after warning them a number of times to move out of the way. Some states have considered this approach but that is a bit much. I’m also not calling for water cannons or police dogs to clear them. But the police should arrest these people promptly and if it was a hospital they were blocking and I was trying to take a loved one there, all bets are off.
You’ll note, I did not mention what these folks were protesting. That’s because it does not matter what they were protesting. No matter how grievous or egregious your cause, you cannot block roads. Period.
CONCLUSION
For being so close the heart of government and Supreme Court, DCA Airport is woefully blind when it come to what it means to express the right of free speech. Protestors who block traffic are not exercising protected speech and should be arrested and severely fined.
It is always best to allow 12 hours for airport arrival before flight time .
It’s how they have’ve justified turning ORD into a homeless shelter.
“Oh…don’t mind these people sleeping in the terminal, they are just early for their flights.”
It is good to see you speak out. I simply do not understand why people put up with these protests. In the last 4–5 years, people have protested anything and everything, burned things, and looted. Politicians are also siding with, if not assisting, the cause. Yes, being quiet is also encouraging.
People won’t realize until they have some emergency to travel somewhere and are stuck with this stupid protest.
Also, the protesters have no respect for the law because they know that even if they are arrested, they will be out in no time and without any consequence.
This +100000000
Road blockage is common during strikes in France. Truckers and farmers find it particularly easy to block traffic but other strikers or protesters can do it.
Don’t compare the loss of livelihoods of truckers/farmers due to a bunch of incompetent brain-washed climate change activists in office to a bunch of out-of-work lowly-paid Pro-Pal protestors
Of course it is not a right to free speech to block traffic. That said, it is the nation’s capital and everyone with a grievance arrives here to protest and bring light to an issue. This is why we have excellent traffic reports (the advice was take Metro) For those trying to just get to work it is exhausting. As much as we wish to arrest them, it is sadly not practical. Most go away after a news truck and a reporter give them a two minute interview with a political hack at their side.
For the traveling public that feel WMATA is not doing enough, please visit and protest. We welcome your input!
This is exactly right. The wonderful freedoms provided by this country allow citizens to express their views publicly on any subject, even if others find that view wrong or objectionable. What they do not allow is for people to selfishly interfere with other people’s lives in some childish attempt to be heard. Everyone has a right to speak, and everyone else has a right to listen, speak back, or ignore the one(s) who are speaking. If everyone had the ability to hold society hostage based on whatever issue they felt was important, it would be absolute chaos. Feel free to stand on the sidewalk, hold you signs, and shout/chant/sing, but get out of the road.
We’ll see how committed they are to their cause when they’re being dragged under my truck.
I admire it. During the George Floyd protests, I-35 in downtown Austin was frequently blocked by protestors. It was a nuisance, and that’s the point. You can take Metro to DCA, and the airport authority has the ability to redirect traffic. I’m sympathetic to a bit of an inconvenience every now and then, especially in the case of somewhere like DCA where there are alternative access points and the public had been advised in advance.
In LA, I was highly sympathetic to the cause of the Armenian-Americans who began protesting on the Hollywood Freeway to voice their outrage over Azerbaijan’s invasion of Artsakh. But the protest was still inappropriate. You do not block traffic. Those who do should have liens put on their bank accounts and real estate.
You think the protesters actually have assets??? And no, a Chime bank account doesn’t count.
In most cases they are broke losers angry because they are broke lazy losers and looking for someone to blame for their life choices.
As for the Armenian’s you mentioned, no one here gives an F about them and if they cared so much about their “country”, they would have stayed here. Instead they came here to become mobsters in Armenian Power 13 and exploit Americans.
This is occasionally true, but frequently the most disruptive protests come from overprivileged college students. They are often the ones who have been told their whole life that their opinion matters and everyone must listen to them. Furthermore, their professors frequently convince them that their cause is so righteous and just that anyone who disagrees with them must be evil. It sometimes takes a upper-class upbringing and a college education to be that self-centered and arrogant.
Should a lien have been placed on Rosa Parks’ assets? She broke the law too. I understand that’s a bit of a false equivalency, but sometimes, as John Lewis said, it requires a little bit of good trouble. The case of Artsakh is a perfect example. Outside of LA the invasion was virtually unknown. The media didn’t address it. I understand their desire to make people aware, and I think sometimes breaking the law (but not damaging people or property) is the only effective way when you sense true desperation.
I’m not arguing legality, I agree it’s against the law. I think in some cases, however, it’s neither immoral nor unethical.
Was it OK when Justin Trudeau froze the bank accounts of any Joe Blow who gave 20 bucks to the trucker’s convoy protests against his vax mandates? The precedent has been set. What would be the difference here, aside from the fact that these protests constitute Left-approved speech but anti-vax protests didn’t?
There are only two conditions required for you to no longer “admire” a protest that blocks traffic: First, it would need to be a cause you didn’t agree with. Second, you would need to be stuck in the traffic on your way to something very important to you (imagine a family member in the hospital, a wedding/funeral, a key business meeting, or simply something as simple as your child’s recital/game/play). Now you have to face the reality that every time someone selfishly blocks traffic to demand that their issue is most important, both of those conditions are true for at least someone in the backed up traffic. If all of us blocked traffic for every issue we felt was of vital importance, nobody could ever get anywhere. This simply can’t be how free speech functions.
These “protests” much like the BLM riots were based on lies and propaganda. Not only is the method of protest wrong, so is the reasons for it.
Hey Jerry – did you ever find what ever happened to all the BLM money they stole from the corporations?
Please don’t get inspired to sit in the road while people are on the way to the airport. It may not end well for you.
Unfortunately, the”rule Of Law” goes out the window when people protest these days. Responsibility for their actions and destruction of property and lives no longer matters . Only if the protestors are on the correct side of the political machine which is currently in power. That is an American tragedy.
It goes along with thhe entitled people we see in airlinerss everyday. I want it so give it to me!
The same people supporting Hamas were the same ones rioting in support of blm.
I hope Jews and other white liberals like the owner of this site realize they don’t care that you’re their “Allies” or enable their victim complexes and grievance politics. They want you dead just the same. They aren’t about equality, they are about erasure. They see you as their enemies.
I hope Jews and other white liberals like the owner of this site realize …
If you think the owner of this site is a liberal you are an idiot.
Stop gaslighting Bobo – or you really can’t identify a liberal, can you?
Glad to see you still refer to it as Ronald Reagan. I use the airport frequently. I have acquaintances who call me out when I refer to it as ‘Reagan’ rather than National. I understand the Dulles name is now under scrutiny.
Ok, I’ll play: I’m a DC metro area native (born and raised) who flies from both DCA and IAD frequently. (I live roughly between them.) I will always call DCA “National” – as do the majority of DC-area natives. The name change to “Washington Reagan” was fine, but seemed without any purpose other than one that was overtly political. We hear enough political speech everywhere we go about our daily living, and we don’t need to add any more heat to an already overheated public discourse. So, it’s “National” for me and everyone I know.
I lived in DC and called it National, but typically will use the full name in a story.
You absolutely have the right to yell “fire” in a crowded theater. There is just one stipulation, there must actually be a fire.